WASHINGTON, June 27 (UPI) -- The judge who ruled that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is unconstitutional issued a stay Thursday pending further appeals.
Circuit Judge Alfred Goodwin's decision to stay his Wednesday ruling does not affect the case immediately, because the ruling was on hold for 45 days pending appeal.
Goodwin gave no reason for putting his ruling on hold.
The Justice Department, which was named as a co-defendant in the case, issued a statement Thursday saying it will immediately take legal steps to reverse the ruling.
"At this time when citizens from all backgrounds have come together to express their solidarity as Americans, this Justice Department will spare no effort to preserve the rights of all Americans."
Gov. Gray Davis of California Thursday directed State Attorney General Bill Lockyer to file a petition with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to reconsider the case.
"The pledge is a powerful and unifying expression of American patriotism," Davis said. "The court's decision was wrong and it should not stand."
"I am confident that an 11-judge panel will reverse this injustice and uphold the Pledge of Allegiance."
The 9th Circuit ruled Wednesday the Pledge of Allegiance was an endorsement of religion in violation of the First Amendment because of the words "under God" inserted after "one nation." The three-judge panel ruled that the phrase, which was inserted in the pledge by Congress in 1954, amounted to "a profession of a religious belief, namely, a belief in monotheism."
Dr. Michael Newdow, the Sacramento atheist who brought the suit over the pledge, said he did so because he did want the government telling his daughter what to believe in. He said Thursday he intends to keep fighting to remove references to God from government, including from U.S. currency.
The decision was criticized by many, including President Bush.
"We need common-sense judges who understand that our rights were derived from God," Bush told reporters at the Group of Eight summit in Canada. "Those are the kind of judges I intend to put on the bench," he added.
His comments were part of a wave of criticism and controversy -- including a resolution of the U.S. Senate and a demonstration by House Republican members -- that swept the United States.
Thursday, the president enlarged on his comments. "America is a nation that is -- a nation that values our relationship with an Almighty," he said. "A declaration of God in the Pledge of Allegiance doesn't violate rights. As a matter of fact, it's a confirmation of the fact that we received our rights from God, as proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence."
Newdow, a physician with a law degree -- who represented himself in the case -- said he had received a barrage of death threats since the news of the case broke Wednesday, but added he still believed the court had made the right decision.
"I don't have anything against the Pledge of Allegiance," he told ABC's "Good Morning America." "I am against the pledge that has the religious dogma that I disagree with. I have nothing against patriotism."
